Ashley Phoenix Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to good.This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care planning information included information about people’s likes and dislikes. Staff we spoke with knew peoples likes and dislikes and were aware of people’s individual preferences. One staff member said, “Before you offer the care you would have to read the support plans and paperwork do you know before you go in how to support the person, their preferences, likes and dislikes”.

Leaders said most people have had a care review in the past year with input from professionals and relatives. We saw records of goals one person would like to achieve and who they would like to help them.

However, some of the person-centred tools used by the provider to record outcomes had not always been updated to record outcomes. The provider confirmed they were aware of shortfalls in record keeping and were addressing this with staff.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Records demonstrated the provider had made referrals to health professionals to seek support around a person’s changing health needs to ensure personalised care. People received mostly consistent care from staff who had got to know people well.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were clearly recorded within care plans and staff were aware of each person’s communication style. Some staff have received specific training to support communication with people who are deafblind and detailed information was in place to help new staff who have not received training communicate with people.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people and relatives in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The provider regularly sought feedback from people and relatives and actions were implemented and shared with the service where shortfalls were identified. Leaders acknowledged some people may not respond directly to feedback requests, therefore they often relied on relatives and observed people’s body language to understand how people were feeling. For example, whether someone was enjoying an activity.Leaders said they wanted to improve record keeping around non-verbal feedback. They told us, ‘You said we did’ information was emailed or sent to families to show the actions taken by the organisation in response to feedback.Relatives confirmed they felt confident in raising concerns if needed and knew who to approach to make a complaint.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Care plans clearly recorded people’s access to health and social care professionals. Staff said they made sure people and relatives were involved with care planning and feedback processes. Staff understood people’s individual needs and how they preferred their care and treatment.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Records demonstrated people were supported to do things they enjoyed doing outside of the service. For example, we saw one person was regularly supported to the shops to purchase items they enjoy. We were also told leaders had arranged for one person to have and activity taster session in a nearby day centre to see if this is something they might like to do.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Leaders said there were end of life plans for some people who have family involvement. However, they had not yet made plans for those who have no family involvement. One relative confirmed they had been involved in end-of-life discussions.